Death Penalty Abolishment
In the past years, the death penalty has spiked various debates, making it a controversial topic. For instance, the death penalty is a deterrent to crime for some people. However, some people argue that it is not a deterrent. The death penalty started in the early years of civilization and was implemented as a form of punishment. In the 1800s, some regions abolished the death penalty due to public opinion. In the United States, the Supreme Court declared that the death penalty was unconstitutional in 1972. However, the decision was reinstated in 1976 and there have been 1400 executions. Therefore, Attorney De Santis believes that the death penalty acts as a deterrent to crimes while Attorney Pattis refutes the argument.
In the video, De Sanctis argues that the death penalty plays a key role in deterring crimes like first-degree murder. In the video, De Sanctis debates with Charles Thomas. However, Charles Thomas does believe that the death penalty deters crimes. De Sanctis supports his argument by stating that there is evidence that the death penalty reduces the rate of crime murder. For instance, De Sanctis published a study in 2012 that focused on the effectiveness of the death penalty. De Sanctis implemented data from Death Penalty Information Centre and FBI’s Uniform Crime Report. According to De Sanctis report, the homicide rate in states that abolished the death penalty was 7.5 per 100,000. On the other hand, the homicide rate for states that still practiced the death penalty was 5.4 per 100,000 individuals. Hence, De Sanctis argues that the death penalty deters crime since criminals know that they will be put to death if they commit a capital crime. Charles Thomas argues that States with the death penalty have not recorded a decrease in the rate of murder. Moreover, De Sanctis argues that prosecutors use the death penalty as a plea bargaining tool. Hence, defendants will accept a plea if they are aware that they facing the death penalty. De Sanctis supports that the death penalty is a deterrent to crime due to various factors. For instance, the punishment is more severe as compared to being in prison. Hence, the possibility of death will make people avoid crimes. In addition, De Sanctis argues that the death penalty is conducted sooner as compared to being sentenced to prison (Death Penalty Debate Part 1 — CT Fox News.m4v). Also, criminals will be deterred from any crime since the death penalty is publicized. In this aspect, the individuals will not commit crimes since it is conducted publicly as compared to life I prison. In addition, De Sanctis argues that death is carried out in a final way. People are more likely to avoid crimes since death is a permanent thing as compared to prison. Another reason that favors the death penalty is that it offers justice for individuals who have lost their loved ones (Griffin 560). For instance, if a criminal kills another person, it is seen as an attack on the family. Hence, the death sentence provides closure to the bereaved In addition, the death sentence serves as justice to the victim. Murder is a heinous crime and should be punished harshly. Thus, the death penalty ensures that a criminal is held accountable for the act. Hence, the individuals will not hurt any other individuals. . Therefore, De Sanctis believes that the death penalty acts as a deterrent to crimes.
Attorney Pattis does not agree with De Sanctis on the death penalty deterring acts acrimes. According to Pattis, the death sentence is a violation of human rights. For instance, she believes that a death sentence is a form of violence. Pattis further explains that it is a form of the government killing people in the form of a fair trial. On the other hand, Pattis believes that the death sentence does not help to deter crime. Moreover, Pattis believes that the death penalty focuses on oppressing minorities. For instance, she believes that the death sentence is racially biased. Additionally, the sentence is biased against people who cannot afford to pay for legal representation. Hence, the individuals are more likely to be punished with the death penalty. Furthermore, a fraction of individuals who are sentenced to death are innocent. People from other races are more likely to be convicted of crimes and later sentenced to death as compared to their white counterparts. Hence, Pattis believes that the death penalty is an act that targets vulnerable individuals (Death Penalty Debate Part 2 — CT Fox News.m4v). The death penalty is biased against minority groups in society. Pattis believes that the sentence is based on revenge and is not a way of seeking justice. For instance, he states that the death penalty is not a way to provide closure to the bereaved. Moreover, Pattus argues that the death sentence punishment is implemented by various states as a tool for political agenda. The punishment maintains control in the states and instills fear in people. Attorney Pattus believes that the death penalty is often used to warn people from challenging authority. Also, the punishment is meant to cover up for disparities in the judicial system. For instance, prosecutorial misconduct and police brutality. Also, punishment is often given to defendants who are not given a fair trial. On the other hand, sentencing criminals to death is a waste of tax money. The act is costly as it requires a lengthy legal process. For instance, the appeal process requires a lot of resources, which are expensive (Saskarayani et al. 58). In addition, the trial process incurs a lot of money. When conducting the death sentence, the states have to spend a lot. On the other hand, sentencing criminals to death is done in a capricious and arbitrary manner. For instance, the sentence is based on the prosecutor. Some prosecutors may impose a death sentence on a defendant due to their race. For instance, the rate of Black defendants who are sentenced to death is higher as compared to the White defendants. Thus, Pattus believes that the death penalty does not deter crime.
The death penalty has been a controversial topic over the past years. Attorney De Sanctis believes that punishment is a way to deter people from crime. He argues that people thinking of committing a capital crime will avoid it since death is a severe punishment. Moreover, death penalty is a way for the bereaved to seek justice. However, Attorney Pattus believes that the death sentence does not deter crime. He believes that the punishment is a violation of human rights and it is biased against minority groups in society. Also, the death penalty is used as a political tool to conceal the disparities in the judicial system.
Works Cited
“Death Penalty Debate Part 1 — CT Fox News.m4v.” YouTube, uploaded by Christopher P.DeSanctis, Oct 26. 2011, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4jcjHKhlww&t=133s
“Death Penalty Debate Part 2 — CT Fox News.m4v.” YouTube, uploaded by Christopher P.DeSanctis, Oct 26. 2011, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7d8Er3-bpW0
Griffin, Timothy. “Comparing expert versus general public rationale for death penalty support and opposition: Is expert perspective on capital punishment consistent with “disciplined retention”?.” Punishment & Society 23.4 (2021): 557-577.
Saskarayani, Ida Ayu Gede Mirah, and Kadek Krisna Puspawati. “Legal Analysis Of Corruption Cases Social Assistance The Minister Of Social Responsibility Based On The Criminal Action Of Corruption And Its Impacts.” Ganesha Law Review 3.1 (2021): 56-67.